...
首页> 外文期刊>Vascular medicine >Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease and prior coronary artery disease: Insights from the EUCLID trial
【24h】

Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease and prior coronary artery disease: Insights from the EUCLID trial

机译:Ticagrelor与氯吡格雷患者患有症状外周血动脉疾病和先前冠状动脉疾病:欧遗址试验的见解

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are at heightened risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We sought to evaluate the risk of concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with symptomatic PAD versus PAD without diagnosed CAD, and whether ticagrelor was superior to clopidogrel in reducing that risk. The EUCLID trial randomized 13,885 patients with PAD to antithrombotic monotherapy with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. CAD was defined as prior myocardial infarction (MI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Median follow-up was 30 months. Among 4032 (29%) patients with PAD and CAD, 63% had prior MI, 54% prior PCI, and 38% prior CABG. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, patients with PAD and CAD had significantly higher rates of the primary endpoint (cardiovascular death/MI/stroke, 15.3% vs 8.9%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.50, 95% CI: 1.13-1.99; p=0.005), but no statistically significant increase in acute limb ischemia (HR 1.28, 95% CI: 0.57-2.85; p=0.55) or major bleeding (HR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.49-2.48; p=0.81) versus PAD without CAD. Among patients with PAD and CAD, there was no differential treatment effect between ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for the primary efficacy endpoint (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87-1.19; p=0.84), acute limb ischemia (HR 1.03, 95% CI: 0.63-1.69; p=0.89), or major bleeding (HR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.66-1.69; p=0.81). There was a statistically significant interaction between prior coronary stent placement and study treatment (p=0.03) with a numerical reduction in the primary efficacy endpoint with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel (13.8% vs 16.8%, HR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.65-1.03; p=0.09). Patients with PAD and prior CAD had higher composite rates of cardiovascular death, MI, and ischemic stroke versus PAD without diagnosed CAD. There were no significant differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in cardiovascular events or major bleeding.
机译:外周枢动疾病(垫)的患者处于心血管发病率和死亡率的风险。我们试图评估伴随患者患者对患者患者的冠状动脉疾病(CAD)而无需诊断的CAD,以及TICAGRELOR是否优于氯吡格雷,降低风险。随机试验随机用TicagreloLor或氯吡格雷随机随机调整13,885名患者垫到抗血栓形成单药治疗。 CAD被定义为先前心肌梗死(MI),经皮冠状动脉干预(PCI),或冠状动脉旁路移植物(CABG)手术。中位后续30个月。在4032例(29%)垫和CAD患者中,63%已先前MI,54%以前的PCI和38%以前的CABG。在调整基线特征后,垫和CAD患者的主要终点率明显高(心血管死亡/ MI /卒中,15.3%Vs 8.9%,危害比(HR)1.50,95%CI:1.13-1.99; P = 0.005),但急性肢体缺血没有统计学显着增加(HR 1.28,95%CI:0.57-2.85; p = 0.55)或重型出血(HR 1.10,95%CI:0.49-2.48; P = 0.81)与垫没有CAD。在垫和CAD患者中,TicagreloRes与氯吡格雷之间没有差异治疗效果,用于初级疗效终点(HR 1.02,95%CI:0.87-1.19; p = 0.84),急性肢体缺血(HR 1.03,95%CI: 0.63-1.69; p = 0.89),或重大出血(HR 1.06,95%CI:0.66-1.69; P = 0.81)。在先前的冠状动脉支架放置和研究处理(P = 0.03)之间存在统计学上显着的相互作用(p = 0.03),其中初级疗效终点与氯吡格雷的初级疗效终点(13.8%Vs 16.8%,HR 0.82,95%CI:0.65-1.03; p = 0.09)。垫和先前CAD的患者具有更高的心血管死亡,MI和缺血性卒中与垫的复合率,没有诊断化的CAD。在心血管事件或重大出血中,Ticagrelor和Clopidogrel之间没有显着差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号